Talk:List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events

2239 Prophecy

Regarding the 2239 prophecy for which the claimant is listed as "Talmud, Orthodox Judaism," the source cited in footnote 3 does not support this at all. The article specifies that this claim was made by 18th century rabbi Elijah ben Solomon Zalman (aka "The Vilna Gaon"). The claimant of this needs to be changed.

The 2239 propecy of the Gaon of Vilna is a far more complex matter then can be understude from that source article. Most of the subject on this matter is in Hebrew only and is part of a great controvercy among reaserchers. To make complex matters short this prophecy is just a ( small )part of a thousend years plan which was made by the Gaon of Vilnas at the 18 cerntury.

• the 2239 date is mearly a small part of it and the plan is supposed to continue for thousends of years more for the POST MESSIHA age .

So it is not e end of the world propecy. A israeli resasercher think that this thousend year plan of the Vilna Gaon was the inspiration beyond the sf series of Asimov Foundation which describe a somwhat similar thousend year plan.#

• Asimov family was of lituanian jews who had know the pupiles of the Vilna Gaon . so he had known about it.

you can read about about the Vilna Gaon thousend year plan with google translator here : [1]

And about Asimov connection to it here : [2]

AND HERE [3] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:A040:199:F2CF:7452:9EF6:A677:DCA7 (talk) 02:28, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

That website you keep citing fails WP:RS. You'll need to find a reliable source before we start considering your proposed changes. Damien Linnane (talk) 22:13, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Isaac Newton and 2060?

Can anyone find a reliable source for this one? Another Wiki User the 2nd (talk) 21:59, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

[4] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:51, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

This isn't a valid prediction. The Isaac Newton 2060 date is simply him predicting a year before which the world would NOT end, not a prediction of when it would. Accordingly, this 'prediction' doesn't belong here. Any attempts to add it will be removed. Damien Linnane (talk) 13:21, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Newton's whatever-you-want-to-call-it is too important not to mentioned somewhere. The introduction would be a good place. It made news in 2003 and then again in 2006. Cpacker666 (talk) 00:12, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I couldn't disagree more. If it's not a date "predicted for apocalyptic events", it doesn't get added. Period. By the way making the news twice is hardly a remarkable feat, and even if it was it still doesn't meet the definition for this article. Damien Linnane (talk) 05:13, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Apocalyptic climate change predictions

How come there isn't a single apocalyptic climate change prediction in this list? Are they on a different page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.3.93.36 (talk) 06:38, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Because climate change predictions don't typically set a specific date. This is a 'List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events'. Nobody expects climate change to destroy the planet on a specific date, or even a specific year. If climate change kills the planet it will happen slowly over a period of decades, maybe even longer, therefore it doesn't belong at this list. Damien Linnane (talk) 13:23, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I came looking for this. Climate change absolutely sets dates, that's why it's called "Climate Emergency" to the uberwoke. It's mind blowing that someone would come in and be so uninformed, or be such a liar. There's even a #$%ing Wiki about Climate Apocalypse.

• 2050 Climate apocalypse
• 2020 [5] "Climate change: 12 years to save the planet? Make that 18 months"
• 2030 [6] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.211.148.117 (talk • contribs)

Blogs and wikipedia itself aren't legitimate sources, and when a date is mentioned, it's usually referring to a deadline by when changes must be made, as opposed to a so called apocalypse. Bkatcher (talk) 20:39, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Completely agree with Bkatcher. The fact there is a Wikipedia article on the Climate apocalypse is neither here nor there and it not helping your argument. Damien Linnane (talk) 00:39, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Archives

If there's someone skilled at archiving around, consider a better solution than the current per-month thing, say, a size of 100K per archive or something like that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:07, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Done. This by the month thing is ridiculous and is making it harder to find anything. Damien Linnane (talk) 01:32, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

far future asteroid timeframe

"It is estimated that every 100 million years, Earth is hit by an asteroid about 10–15 km in diameter, comparable in size to the one that triggered the K–Pg extinction which killed non-avian dinosaurs 66 million years ago."

Shouldn't this then be listed at 34 million years, as 66 of the 100 have passed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.246.23.129 (talk) 22:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

No. Statistical probability doesn't work like that. See Gambler's fallacy. Damien Linnane (talk) 00:33, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Muhammad's prophecies

Hi, my edit was just reverted. It was about Muhammad's prophecy that nothing will live 100 years from this night (Sahih Bukhari 1:10:575). The hadith says: "Narrated `Abdullah bin `Umar: The Prophet (ﷺ) prayed one of the `Isha' prayer in his last days and after finishing it with Taslim, he stood up and said, "Do you realize (the importance of) this night? Nobody present on the surface of the earth tonight would be living after the completion of one hundred years from this night." The people made a mistake in grasping the meaning of this statement of Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) and they indulged in those things which are said about these narrators (i.e. some said that the Day of Resurrection will be established after 100 years etc.) But the Prophet (ﷺ) said, "Nobody present on the surface of earth tonight would be living after the completion of 100 years from this night"; he meant "When that century (people of that century) would pass away.""

The English translation is one that I've found on the internet. I wouldn't say it's 100% accurate, but anyway, the hadith clearly says that there were people at that time who understood it to mean the world will end within 100 years (btw. the hadith was written 200 years later, so at that time it was obviously unacceptable interpretation). And I've also said in my edit that there are two interpretations (either all people will die, or just Muhammad's generation). And he died 632, so I'd say the end was expected 732. And besides this hadith, there are also others which indicate that "the Hour" (the Islamic version of apocalypse) will come soon.

Sahih Muslim 41:7049 says: "Anas reported Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) as saying: I and the Last Hour have been sent like this and (he while doing it) joined the forefinger with the middle finger.".

Also Sahih Muslim 41:7052 says a boy living in Muhammad's time wouldn't grow very old before the Hour comes: "Anas b. Malik reported that a person asked Allah's Apostle (ﷺ): When would the Last Hour come? Thereupon Allah's Messenger (way peace be upon him) kept quiet for a while. Then looked at a young boy in his presence belonging to the tribe of Azd Shanu'a and he said: If this boy lives he would not grow very old till the Last Hour would come to you. Anas said that this young boy was of our age during those days."

Also Abu Dawud 14:2529 (sahih) links the conquest of Jerusalem (which happened in the 1st Islamic century) to the Hour: "Narrated Abdullah ibn Hawalah al-Azdi: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sent us on foot to get spoil, but we returned without getting any. When he saw the signs of distress on our faces, he stood up on our faces and said: O Allah, do not put them under my care, for I would be too weak to care for them; do not put them in care of themselves, for they would be incapable of that, and do not put them in the care of men, for they would choose the best things for themselves. He then placed his hand on my head and said: Ibn Hawalah, when you see the caliphate has settled in the holy land, earthquakes, sorrows and serious matters will have drawn near and on that day the Last Hour will be nearer to mankind than this hand of mine is to your head."

I think the most important is the first one, because it says explicitly 100 years and that it was in his last days (so the date is 632+100) and it also says that the people understood it that way. And I'd also add there that there is also the other interpretation (that only Muhammad's generation will die). If you don't want to say "Muhammad", because maybe he didn't mean it, then I see that for the year 1033 we have "Various Christians" as the claimant so here it could be "Various Muslims". We could say Muhammad said that everything on earth will die within 100 years from this night and that some Muslims interpreted it that way. And it's not a weak interpretation if we consider the other hadiths that I've mentioned.

And I made a mistake in my edit, I wrote 713-732 (100 years from between first revelation and death), but the hadith says at his last days so it must have been 632. So I don't want to just revert revert. You can add it. TurboDrak (talk) 15:56, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

There's a few issues here. Firstly your citations don't link anywhere. You're using WP:SFN templates, but your templates don't link to anything in the reference list. Secondly if you're just citing the original religious texts, that's not appropriate. You need to find a reliable source that explicitly states people interpreted the religious texts as a prediction of the end of the world, not the original quote that people misinterpreted.

However, there's also that the prediction, regardless of misinterpretation or attribution, is vague. This is a list of specific predicted dates. 'Within 100 years' is not very specific. We had the same issue with the bible and the quote attributed to Jesus that "Some of you standing here will still be alive when I return." While there was never a clear consensus on that (see here, here, here and here), that 'prediction' has been removed, partially on the grounds that it too is vague and does not give a set date. The article does not currently add predictions that do not give a set year (with the except of scientific far-future predictions). Damien Linnane (talk) 23:02, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

I'll go through that article on reliable sources. I don't think that hadiths are reliable, but it's practically the only thing we have about early Islam. And based on the embarrassment criterion, people probably wouldn't make it up after the 100 years.

The hadith contains both the original quote and information that people interpreted it that way. The claim that it was a MISinterpretation it is just an opinion. And I repeat that the whole text was written after 200 years.

What about 375-400 or 1200-1260? They are also not very specific. Will you delete them? TurboDrak (talk) 12:35, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

First things first. If there's no secondary coverage of people explicitly saying the quotes were interpreted as a predicted date, then there's nothing to add. Please see WP:OR. We cannot add our own interpretation of religious texts, only coverage from reliable sources. Find a reliable source that states a prediction was made, that isn't the original hadith, then we can talk about adding a prediction based on what the source says. I think it's likely we still won't be able to add the prediction, but there's no point getting ahead of ourselves until such a source is found. Damien Linnane (talk) 05:21, 26 October 2021 (UTC)